sciencedaily: The ecological costs of war: Conflict a consistent killer of African megafauna

Credit: Image by Joshua Daskin, Yale University



Researchers report that war has been a consistent factor in the decades-long decline of Africa's large mammals. But the researchers also found that wildlife populations rarely collapsed to the point where recovery was impossible, meaning that even protected areas severely affected by conflict are promising candidates for conservation and rehabilitation efforts.


The researchers found that 71 percent of Africa's protected areas experienced one or more conflicts from 1946 to 2010. Wars occurred in a quarter of these areas for an average of nine or more years. The map (figure a) above shows protected areas in Africa and the number of conflict years each endured as indicated by the color scale. Blue indicates no years of conflict and red signifies at most 35 years of conflict. The right-hand table (figure b) lists each nation and the number of protected areas in that country (far right). The vertical lines in the colored boxes (center) indicate the average number of conflict years for each nation's protected areas.

Credit: Image by Joshua Daskin, Yale University


When Joshua Daskin traveled to Mozambique's Gorongosa National Park in 2012, the park and the iconic large animals that roamed it were returning from the brink of extinction. Gorongosa, among Africa's most spectacular wildlife preserves until the 1970s, had been devastated by an anti-colonial war of liberation followed by a ghastly 15-year civil war -- a one-two punch that exterminated more than 90 percent of the park's wildlife.


The park's violent past intrigued Daskin, then a first-year Princeton graduate student in ecology and evolutionary biology. As he explored the savannas and grasslands of Gorongosa with his advisor, Robert Pringle, an assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology, the two researchers discussed whether similar wildlife declines might have occurred across Africa during the many conflicts of the 20th century. If so, they wondered how severe the impacts had been, and if animals generally retain the capacity to rebound like those in Gorongosa had, or if war was a human pressure that most animals just couldn't withstand.


After years of examining conflict in Africa's protected areas, Daskin and Pringle reported in the journal Nature Jan. 10 that war has been a consistent factor in the decades-long decline of large mammals in Africa. Populations that were stable in peaceful areas needed only a slight increase in conflict frequency to begin a downward spiral. But, the researchers report, while wildlife populations declined in conflict areas, they rarely collapsed to the point where recovery was impossible.


The study found that more than 70 percent of Africa's protected areas were touched by war between 1946 and 2010, an era during which the overthrow of European colonial rule was followed in many countries by violent post-colonial power struggles. Elephants, hippos, giraffes, and other large mammals perished as combatants and hungry citizens hunted animals for meat and for marketable commodities such as ivory.


Nonetheless, said Daskin, who completed the study as part of his doctoral dissertation at Princeton, the findings show that even those protected areas most severely affected by conflict remain promising candidates for conservation and rehabilitation efforts. The study was supported by the National Science Foundation and the Princeton Environmental Institute (PEI).


"We hope our data and conclusions will help in the effort to prioritize these areas for attention and funding from their governments and from international NGOs," said Daskin, now a Donnelley Postdoctoral Fellow at Yale University. "We're presenting evidence that although mammal populations decline in war zones, they don't often go extinct. With the right policies and resources, it should often be possible to reverse the declines and restore functional ecosystems, even in historically conflict-prone areas."


The study was needed to establish a general scientific expectation about how conflict typically affects wildlife populations, said Pringle, who is associated faculty in PEI. "It wasn't obvious to us in advance that conflict would have negative effects on wildlife populations," Pringle said. "Different studies of different places at different times have found both positive and negative effects of conflict on biodiversity, but the overall net effect had never been measured." For instance, previous research has shown that animal populations have increased in contested regions such as the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) and rural Zimbabwe during that country's Bush War of 1964-1979.


Daskin and Pringle, however, found that with few exceptions, frequent conflict resulted in a downward trend among large-animal populations. No other factor they evaluated exhibited the same consistent effect. There was no statistically detectable effect on wildlife trajectories from mining, urban development, corruption, drought, or even the intensity of the conflict as measured by the number of human battle fatalities.


"This enabled us to make some educated guesses about what the underlying mechanisms might be," Daskin said. "Most of the effects of conflict on wildlife populations seem to be due to knock-on socioeconomic effects that degrade the institutional capacity for biodiversity conservation, or the collective societal ability to prioritize and pay for it."


Hugh Possingham, the Chief Scientist at The Nature Conservancy, concurred that social structures ultimately determine the fate of animals and protected areas. Possingham had no role in the research but is familiar with it and has published on related topics.


"The most surprising finding is the strength of the relationship between the presence of conflict and declines in large mammals," Possingham said. "One might have imagined that the magnitude or scale of conflict would be the driver, but the mere presence of conflict seems to be a strong predictor in its own right.


"This is unusual and useful," he continued. "It suggests to me that any sort of conflict needs to be avoided, even if it's at a low level, and such conflicts may be indicative of broader social and institutional problems that are the primary drivers of mammal declines. Bottom line -- to stop threats such as bushmeat hunting, governance really has to be strong."


Daskin and Pringle found that 71 percent of Africa's protected areas experienced one or more conflicts from 1946 to 2010. For a quarter of these areas, wars occurred for an average of nine or more years. Several large nations experienced an average of 20 or more years of conflict per protected area, including Chad, Namibia and Sudan (before it split into Sudan and South Sudan in 2011).


To conduct the analysis, Daskin drew from nearly 500 sources to find estimates of a specific animal species' abundance from at least two years between 1946 and 2010. He compared those estimates in order to calculate the change in population density during a given time interval. Daskin then used a series of databases to identify how many conflicts overlapped with each of Africa's protected areas during the study interval. In the end, the researchers examined the trends of 253 animal populations representing 36 species, ranging from antelopes to elephants, in 126 protected areas across 19 countries.


"No one else had made the effort to assemble conflict data across this range of parks and make them talk with the wildlife data," Daskin said. "These data were all freely available, but not always highly accessible."


Gorongosa, the park in Mozambique that originally inspired the study, exemplifies the thrust of the findings, Daskin and Pringle said. From 1977 to 1992, government soldiers, anti-government militias, and refugees alternately fought in or fled through the park. For years after the war, displaced and dispossessed residents hunted wildlife. By the early 2000s, the elephant population had crashed by more than 75 percent, while successive aerial counts found that buffalo, hippo, wildebeest, and zebra numbers were hovering in the single or double digits.


Yet, none of these animal populations disappeared completely. Since 2004, wildlife in Gorongosa have rebounded to 80 percent of their total pre-war abundance. Park staff, the Mozambican government and the nonprofit Gorongosa Restoration Project have worked with neighboring communities to nurture the remnant animal populations by suppressing illegal hunting and creating educational and employment opportunities for villagers within the park.


"Our results show that the case of Gorongosa could be general," said Pringle, who serves on the board of the Gorongosa Project. "Gorongosa is as close as you can come to wiping out a whole fauna without extinguishing it, and even there we're seeing that we can rehabilitate wildlife populations and regrow a functional ecosystem. That suggests that the other high-conflict sites in our study can, at least in principle, also be rehabilitated."


Pringle and Daskin emphasized in their paper that wildlife recovery rests in the hands of local people. "I would love to see conservation and humanitarian organizations collaborate on post-conflict relief work," Pringle said. "Long-term recovery hinges on the health and hopefulness of the people, and healthy environments catalyze human health and hope. It's a positive-feedback loop."


When people have a personal and economic stake in a thriving ecosystem, they embrace protective behaviors such as preventing poaching and monitoring wildlife, Possingham said. "This publication confirms the philosophy behind that approach," he said.


"In any area where large-mammal protection is a concern, one has to get the people-side of the conservation initiative sorted -- establishing alternative livelihoods, law and order, education, anti-corruption, etc. -- at the same time as taking habitat-protection and anti-poaching actions on the ground," he said. "If you don't tackle the ultimate drivers such as a breakdown of civil society, then taking action on the ground and investing in park management might not work.


Find out more...

Go back


Climate Policy: What drives policy change for REDD+? A qualitative comparative analysis of the interplay between institutional and policy arena factors

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) has emerged as a promising climate change mitigation mechanism in developing countries. In order to identify the enabling conditions for achieving progress in the implementation of an effective, efficient and equitable REDD+, this paper examines national policy settings in a comparative analysis across 13 countries with a focus on both institutional context and the actual setting of the policy arena.

Read more …

African Parks - Elephants on the Rise

Zakouma has had a very troubled past. Between 2002 to 2010 approximately 4,000 elephants were killed for their ivory, and only 450 elephants remained. African Parks assumed management of the park in 2010 on behalf of the Chadian Government, and we immediately overhauled law enforcement and worked with the surrounding communities to bring much-needed security to the region.

Read more …

IIED long read: Finding a green path for China and Africa?

Chinese companies are spreading over Africa’s land. Chinese loggers, miners, farmers and traders, and multimillion-dollar infrastructural investments are fast becoming a feature across the continent. Some of them gobble up forest and woodland. Some bring huge benefits to African economies. Some do both. All of them are changing Africa.

Read more …

CIFOR: Join experts in Nairobi to advance landscape restoration in Africa

NAIROBI (1st August 2018) – Finding solutions to meet the challenge of landscape restoration in Africa, where almost 50 million hectares of land is degraded each year, is a complex challenge requiring an innovative, coordinated, international response, says a top forestry expert who will speak at an upcoming conference in Nairobi.

Read more …

FTNS Annual Report 2017

From January 1st to December 31st 2017, the report may take a long time to develop, so varying and numerous are the actions! What then is worth remembering among the multitude of projects implemented in the transboundary TNS complex ?

Read more …

18th Meeting of Parties of the Congo Basin Forest Partnership: Briefing note and Draft agenda

The 18th Meeting of Parties of the Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP) will take place on 27 and 28 November 2018 in Brussels, Belgium. Kindly download the Briefing note and Draft agenda of the meeting…

Read more …

Fern-From the forests to the EU: Civil society explains how the EU can help protect forests and forest people rights

Civil society representatives from Ghana, Liberia, Cameroon, Congo and Vietnam made the journey to Europe to relate their experiences, successes, challenges and lessons learned from FLEGT and VPAs (Voluntary Partnership Agreements) to curb the trade in illegal logging.

Read more …

Nouabalé-Ndoki cMonthly update JUNE 2018

I am pleased to annonce the official launch of the inception phase of the Sustainable Wildlife Management (SWiM) project in Congo, which is funded by the European Union and implemented by a consortium including FAO, CIRAD, CIFOR and WCS. This project plans to develop a replicable model of sustainable community management of hunting activities in forestry concessions.

Read more …

CBFP News Archive


FTNS Annual Report 2017
Cidt : FGF Brazzaville 2018
Fourth CBFP Council meeting
Forest Watch - April 2018